Q25
Homosexuality
The question, at its strongest
"I did not choose to be attracted to people of my own sex; most gay people say the same, and the science agrees that orientation is not a simple choice. Islam tells me I may never marry the person I love, never have a partner, and must live alone for life — a burden that straight Muslims never carry. In some countries the law punishes people like me with prison or death, and in many families, being found out means being thrown out. Some young gay Muslims take their own lives. How can a just and merciful God create someone this way and then forbid them love?"
Why people ask it
Some ask because it is their own life. Others ask for a friend, a child or a sibling, or because modern ethics treats this as a matter of equality and they cannot see how Islam's position fits.
Short answer
Mainstream Islamic law, in all the Sunni and Shiʿi schools, prohibits same-sex sexual acts, and the Quran's story of Lot is read that way by classical commentators. But Islamic law judges acts, not feelings: attraction one did not choose is not a sin, and a Muslim who feels it and does not act on it "carries no blame" (Yaqeen). The legal penalties the schools describe were tied to strict proof — four witnesses or a confession — and to a functioning legal system, not to private discovery or vigilante action. A small revisionist minority, led by Scott Kugle, argues the Quran does not forbid loving same-sex relationships; their critics argue that this misreads the texts. Science shows that same-sex behaviour is partly genetic, influenced by many genes, and not predictable for any individual, and that attempts to "change" orientation are linked to harm. The burden of lifelong celibacy is real, and this page does not pretend it is small. Every person has God-given dignity, and cruelty, violence and family rejection are wrong.
The full answer
10min read
For the heart and mind
If you are gay, bisexual or same-sex attracted and Muslim, you are not alone, and you are not less of a Muslim for what you feel. The tradition's own principle is that "a person is not held accountable for feelings they did not choose" (Yaqeen). God "does not charge a soul except [with that within] its capacity" (2:286).
If you are in danger — from yourself, or from others — get help now. Call your local emergency number. If you are thinking about suicide, call a crisis line in your country (findahelpline.com lists them). Naseeha, a Muslim helpline based in Canada, answers 24 hours a day on the North American toll-free number 1-866-627-3342 and by live chat, with counsellors in English, French, Arabic, Urdu, Hindi, Punjabi, Bengali and Gujarati; it is non-judgemental and confidential (except where there is a serious risk of harm), and you can stay anonymous.
Practical steps. You can pray, fast, go to the mosque and belong to your community; none of that depends on what you feel. Find one trusted, discreet person — a counsellor, an imam you trust, a friend. Avoid "conversion" programmes (see science, below). If your family's reaction might put you at risk, think about your safety before telling them. Muslims who hold the mainstream view and live celibate, and Muslims who hold the revisionist view, both exist; you will meet both, and you deserve to be treated with respect by both.
If you are a parent or friend, your first duty is to keep the person safe and loved. Rejection and shaming do not make anyone more faithful; they put lives at risk.
What the Quran says
The story of Lot. "And [We had sent] Lot when he said to his people, 'Do you commit such immorality as no one has preceded you with from among the worlds? Indeed, you approach men with desire, instead of women. Rather, you are a transgressing people.' But the answer of his people was only that they said, 'Evict them from your city! Indeed, they are men who keep themselves pure.' So We saved him and his family, except for his wife… And We rained upon them a rain [of stones]" (7:80–84), from Sura al-Aʿraf, Meccan.
Other tellings. "Do you approach males among the worlds / And leave what your Lord has created for you as mates? But you are a people transgressing" (26:165–166), Meccan. "Do you commit immorality while you are seeing? Do you indeed approach men with desire instead of women? Rather, you are a people behaving ignorantly" (27:54–55), Meccan. Other passages (11:77–83; 15:61–77; 29:28–35) tell of the people's attempt on Lot's guests; they were not quoted.
How the classical commentators read them. Ibn Kathir says the people of Lot had relations with males instead of females, and that "this evil practice was not known among the Children of Adam before"; he cites ʿAmr ibn Dinar: "Never before the people of Lut did a male have sex with another male." Al-Tabari, as Vaid shows, integrates 7:80–81 with "a simple and straightforward explanation" that the iniquity was "coming with desire unto men instead of women" (Vaid, pp. 61–62).
4:15–16. "Those who commit unlawful sexual intercourse of your women… confine the guilty women to houses… And the two who commit it among you, dishonor them both. But if they repent and correct themselves, leave them alone" (4:15–16), Medinan. Ibn Kathir reports Mujahid saying 4:16 "was revealed about the case of two men who do it", and that the ruling was later abrogated by the penalties for unlawful sex. Others read "the two" as a man and a woman.
What the Prophet (pbuh) taught
The key reports. Ibn ʿAbbas (ra) reports the Prophet (pbuh) as saying: "If you find anyone doing as Lot's people did, kill the one who does it, and the one to whom it is done" (Abū Dāwūd 4462 Ḥasan ṣaḥīḥ — al-Albānī; al-Albani: ḥasan ṣaḥīḥ). Another report from Ibn ʿAbbas curses those who do "the act of the people of Lot"; Brown calls this the most reliable condemnation (p. 10); it was graded ṣaḥīḥ by al-Hakim, Ibn Hibban, al-Diyaʾ al-Maqdisi and al-Albani (p. 13).
How strong are they? The killing report was graded ṣaḥīḥ by Ibn al-Jarud, al-Tabari, al-Hakim and al-Suyuti (p. 9). Critics focus on its narrator ʿAmr ibn Abi ʿAmr: Ibn Maʿin and al-Nasaʾi said his hadiths were "not strong", while Ahmad ibn Hanbal and Abu Hatim said "there is nothing wrong with him" (p. 15). Ibn Hajar called the report weak in Fath al-Bari but noted disagreement in Bulugh al-Maram (p. 17); al-Tirmidhi noted conflicting evidence on the punishment (p. 16). A stoning report from ʿAli was judged weak by Ibn Hajar (p. 17). So the prohibition is firmly established; the specific penalty was disputed among hadith scholars themselves.
The law: what the four schools hold
What ḥadd means. A ḥadd (plural ḥudūd) is a fixed penalty set by God for a specific crime; taʿzīr is a discretionary penalty left to a judge.
The schools' positions. According to Brown (2017, pp. 4–5) and Sedick (2024):
- Maliki — the main position is death by stoning for both partners.
- Shafiʿi — al-Shafiʿi's early view was death for both. For the later school, the sources differ: Brown (p. 4) gives the dominant view as "the active partner is executed by the sword while the passive partner is punished with 100 lashes and exiled for one year"; Sedick, citing al-Nawawi's Minhaj, gives the zinā (unlawful sex) rule — death if married, a hundred lashes and a year's exile if not.
- Hanbali — Ahmad's early view was death for both; the later school treats it like zinā.
- Hanafi — Abu Hanifa held there is no fixed ḥadd; the penalty is taʿzīr, with execution possible for repeat offenders as a matter of governance (Brown). His students Abu Yusuf and Muhammad al-Shaybani treated it like zinā (Sedick).
- Ibn Hazm (Zahiri) held the act "categorically forbidden" but rejected a fixed ḥadd, requiring taʿzīr (Vaid, pp. 73, 76).
Proof and process. All the schools required four male witnesses to the act itself, or a clear, voluntary confession — standards Sedick calls "nigh impossible", meant to protect people from accusation. He adds that "no one is allowed to take the law into their own hands", and that these laws presuppose a full legal system with courts. In this framework, what could be punished was a proven act, not an inclination (Sedick; El-Rouayheb, below).
Desire and act. El-Rouayheb's study of the Arab-Islamic world from 1500 to 1800 shows that jurists treated intercourse between men as sinful but distinguished it sharply from feelings, chaste love and even love poetry, some of which they permitted (as summarised by Wikipedia). The modern idea of a fixed "orientation" did not exist; the law judged acts.
What states do today. According to ILGA World's 2024 report, 60 UN member states criminalise consensual same-sex acts by law and two more do so in practice; Uganda's 2023 law includes a possible death penalty, and reports surfaced of executions in Afghanistan and Yemen (PinkNews). Many of these countries are Muslim-majority, some are not. Whether such laws meet classical Islamic standards of proof is a separate question from whether they exist.
What science says
Genes play a part, but no single gene decides. Established (.) In a genome study of 477,522 people, Ganna and colleagues (Science, 2019) found "five loci significantly associated with same-sex sexual behavior". "In aggregate, all tested genetic variants accounted for 8 to 25% of variation", and the variants "do not allow meaningful prediction of an individual's sexual behavior". Twin and family studies show the behaviour is "partly genetically influenced". So sexuality is shaped by many genes, environment and experience; it is not a simple choice, and it is not a simple genetic switch.
"Conversion" efforts are linked to harm. [Moderate.] In a nationally representative US sample of 1,518 sexual-minority adults, Blosnich and colleagues (2020) found that those exposed to sexual orientation change efforts — 80.8% of them from a religious leader — had higher odds of suicidal ideation (adjusted odds ratio 1.92, 95% CI 1.01–3.64), planning (1.75, CI 1.01–3.06) and suicide attempts with no or minor injury (1.88, CI 1.01–3.50) than those not exposed, after controlling for adverse childhood experiences; for attempts with moderate or severe injury the difference (1.67, CI 0.76–3.64) was not statistically significant. Only 6.9% of the sample (108 people) were exposed, and all the intervals are close to 1. The authors note that the measure was new and that they could not time the change efforts relative to childhood adversity, so causation is not proven. A published reanalysis (Sullins, 2022) disputes the findings; it has not yet been consulted here.
The reasoning
"Why would God make someone gay and then forbid them love?" The mainstream Islamic answer has several parts, and it is fair to say none is complete.
First, Islam does not teach that God created a person in order to sin. It teaches that every person has desires, some of which they may not act on, and that what is judged is what they choose to do (2:286). A same-sex-attracted Muslim who does not act on it "carries no blame", and "the effort to stay within God's limits can itself earn reward" (Yaqeen).
Second, the burden of not being able to marry is not unique to gay Muslims: many Muslims never find a spouse, or are widowed young, or are unable to marry for other reasons. Limit: this comparison is imperfect. For a gay Muslim, the burden is not a circumstance that might change, and it falls on a whole dimension of life; it is right to say this plainly.
Third, Islam does not reduce love to sex. Deep friendship, family, community and the love of God are open to everyone. Limit: this is true but can sound like a consolation prize to someone who wants a partner, and should be offered with humility, not as a dismissal.
Fourth, the answer finally rests on trust that God's commands come from knowledge and mercy, even when a person cannot see their wisdom. Limit: that is a theological answer, not a philosophical proof, and it will not persuade someone who does not share the premise.
The strongest objection, and the reply
The revisionist argument (Kugle). Scott Kugle, in Homosexuality in Islam (2010), argues that the Lot verses condemn rape and the violation of hospitality — the people tried to assault Lot's guests — "rather than forbidding same-sex intercourse"; that the hadith condemning such acts have weak chains or reflect later views; and that classical jurists had "no actual consensus on the nature of the act" (Rahemtulla's review). He treats the medieval jurist Ibn Hazm as "our guide" (Vaid, p. 72; page numbers from running heads may be off by one).
Vaid's reply. Mobeen Vaid (2017) argues that Kugle's rape reading depends on late storytelling material; that 7:81 itself names the act ("you approach men with desire, instead of women"); that "traditional exegetes do not mention any wives when commenting on Q. 26:165–66" (p. 71); and that "Ibn Hazm never demurred as to whether same-sex sexual behavior was prohibited" — Ibn Hazm called such conduct "horrible and disgusting" in Ṭawq al-Ḥamāma and only rejected a fixed ḥadd (pp. 73–76). The reviewer Rahemtulla praises Kugle's book as "groundbreaking" while criticising gaps in it.
Assessment. The revisionist case is worth reading because it raises real questions about what the texts emphasise. But the classical reading rests on the Quran's own words in 7:81, 26:165–166 and 27:55, which name desire for men instead of women, and on a broad consensus that even Ibn Hazm shared. Limit: the revisionists reply that ancient categories of sexual conduct do not map onto modern loving, committed relationships, and that question — whether the texts address what we now call orientation — is not fully settled by pointing to the verses.
"The penalties are barbaric." Reply: the schools differed widely; the Hanafis set no fixed penalty; all required near-impossible proof; and none allowed private violence. Limit: several classical schools did prescribe death, some states still do, and that history should not be hidden.
The range of views
- All classical schools — same-sex acts are prohibited; feelings are not punished.
- Maliki — death; Shafiʿi, Hanbali (later) — like zinā; Hanafi (Abu Hanifa) — discretionary; Ibn Hazm — discretionary.
- Contemporary mainstream (e.g. Yaqeen) — attraction is not sinful; celibacy is the path; support, not shame.
- Revisionist minority (Kugle) — the Quran does not forbid loving same-sex relationships; rejected by most scholars (Vaid).
Questions readers ask next
Is being gay a sin?
In mainstream Islamic teaching, no: feelings one did not choose are not sins. Acts are what the law addresses.
What do 26:165–166 and 27:54–55 say?
They describe Lot's people approaching men "with desire instead of women" and leaving "what your Lord has created for you as mates".
What does ḥadd mean, and what did schools other than Abu Hanifa's hold?
A fixed penalty. Malikis held death; later Shafiʿis and Hanbalis treated the act like zinā; Abu Hanifa held there was no fixed penalty.
Is the punishment actually applied?
In a few states, laws exist and are sometimes enforced; in most Muslim-majority countries, the classical standards of proof are not what is applied. Vigilante violence is forbidden in Islamic law.
Is the revisionist view worth taking seriously?
It is worth understanding. Most scholars think it misreads the texts (Vaid).
How do gay Muslims live their faith in practice?
In many ways: some live celibate within mainstream teaching, with the support of friends and counsellors; some hold revisionist views; many are simply trying to stay close to God and safe. What helps all of them is a community that keeps their dignity and confidence.
Key verses
وَلُوطًا إِذْ قَالَ لِقَوْمِهِۦٓ أَتَأْتُونَ ٱلْفَٰحِشَةَ مَا سَبَقَكُم بِهَا مِنْ أَحَدٍ مِّنَ ٱلْعَٰلَمِينَ٨٠ إِنَّكُمْ لَتَأْتُونَ ٱلرِّجَالَ شَهْوَةً مِّن دُونِ ٱلنِّسَآءِ ۚ بَلْ أَنتُمْ قَوْمٌ مُّسْرِفُونَ٨١ وَمَا كَانَ جَوَابَ قَوْمِهِۦٓ إِلَّآ أَن قَالُوٓا۟ أَخْرِجُوهُم مِّن قَرْيَتِكُمْ ۖ إِنَّهُمْ أُنَاسٌ يَتَطَهَّرُونَ٨٢ فَأَنجَيْنَٰهُ وَأَهْلَهُۥٓ إِلَّا ٱمْرَأَتَهُۥ كَانَتْ مِنَ ٱلْغَٰبِرِينَ٨٣ وَأَمْطَرْنَا عَلَيْهِم مَّطَرًا ۖ فَٱنظُرْ كَيْفَ كَانَ عَٰقِبَةُ ٱلْمُجْرِمِينَ٨٤
Transliteration: walūṭan idh qāla liqawmihi atatūna l-fāḥishata mā sabaqakum bihā min aḥadin mina l-ʿālamīna · innakum latatūna l-rijāla shahwatan min dūni l-nisāi bal antum qawmun mus'rifūna · wamā kāna jawāba qawmihi illā an qālū akhrijūhum min qaryatikum innahum unāsun yataṭahharūna · fa-anjaynāhu wa-ahlahu illā im'ra-atahu kānat mina l-ghābirīna · wa-amṭarnā ʿalayhim maṭaran fa-unẓur kayfa kāna ʿāqibatu l-muj'rimīna
And [We had sent] Lot when he said to his people, "Do you commit such immorality as no one has preceded you with from among the worlds? Indeed, you approach men with desire, instead of women. Rather, you are a transgressing people." But the answer of his people was only that they said, "Evict them from your city! Indeed, they are men who keep themselves pure." So We saved him and his family, except for his wife; she was of those who remained [with the evildoers]. And We rained upon them a rain [of stones]. Then see how was the end of the criminals.
Translation: Saheeh International
-
Allah does not charge a soul except [with that within] its capacity. It will have [the consequence of] what [good] it has gained, and it will bear [the consequence of] what [evil] it has earned. "Our Lord, do not impose blame upon us if we have forgotten or erred. Our Lord, and lay not upon us a burden like that which You laid upon those before us. Our Lord, and burden us not with that which we have no ability to bear. And pardon us; and forgive us; and have mercy upon us. You are our protector, so give us victory over the disbelieving people." 2:286
Arabic text and transliteration
لَا يُكَلِّفُ ٱللَّهُ نَفْسًا إِلَّا وُسْعَهَا ۚ لَهَا مَا كَسَبَتْ وَعَلَيْهَا مَا ٱكْتَسَبَتْ ۗ رَبَّنَا لَا تُؤَاخِذْنَآ إِن نَّسِينَآ أَوْ أَخْطَأْنَا ۚ رَبَّنَا وَلَا تَحْمِلْ عَلَيْنَآ إِصْرًا كَمَا حَمَلْتَهُۥ عَلَى ٱلَّذِينَ مِن قَبْلِنَا ۚ رَبَّنَا وَلَا تُحَمِّلْنَا مَا لَا طَاقَةَ لَنَا بِهِۦ ۖ وَٱعْفُ عَنَّا وَٱغْفِرْ لَنَا وَٱرْحَمْنَآ ۚ أَنتَ مَوْلَىٰنَا فَٱنصُرْنَا عَلَى ٱلْقَوْمِ ٱلْكَٰفِرِينَ
lā yukallifu l-lahu nafsan illā wus'ʿahā lahā mā kasabat waʿalayhā mā ik'tasabat rabbanā lā tuākhidh'nā in nasīnā aw akhṭanā rabbanā walā taḥmil ʿalaynā iṣ'ran kamā ḥamaltahu ʿalā alladhīna min qablinā rabbanā walā tuḥammil'nā mā lā ṭāqata lanā bihi wa-uʿ'fu ʿannā wa-igh'fir lanā wa-ir'ḥamnā anta mawlānā fa-unṣur'nā ʿalā l-qawmi l-kāfirīna
Sources
- Saheeh International via the site's Tanzil data — 7:80–84, 2:286, 17:70, 30:21.
- Saheeh International via legacy.quran.com — 26:165–168, 27:54–55, 4:15–16.
- Ibn Kathir, Tafsir (abridged English), on 7:81 and 4:16, surahquran.com.
- Sunan Abi Dawud 4462 (sunnah.com, graded by al-Albani).
- Jonathan A. C. Brown, "A Pre-Modern Defense of the Hadiths on Sodomy: An Annotated Translation & Analysis of al-Suyūṭī's Attaining the Hoped for in Service of the Messenger", American Journal of Islamic Social Sciences 34:3 (2017) — author's corrected manuscript, https://drjonathanbrown.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/A_Pre-Modern_Defense_of_the_Hadiths_on_Sodomy.pdf.
- Irshaad Sedick, "How Does Islamic Law Address Same-Sex Relations?", SeekersGuidance (21 December 2024).
- Mobeen Vaid, "Can Islam Accommodate Homosexual Acts? Qur'anic Revisionism and the Case of Scott Kugle", American Journal of Islamic Social Sciences 34:3 (2017), pp. 45–97.
- Shadaab Rahemtulla, review of Scott Siraj al-Haqq Kugle, Homosexuality in Islam (Oneworld, 2010), American Journal of Islamic Social Sciences 28:1.
- "Before Homosexuality in the Arab-Islamic World, 1500–1800", Wikipedia — summary of Khaled El-Rouayheb's book (University of Chicago Press, 2005).
- Andrea Ganna et al., "Large-scale GWAS reveals insights into the genetic architecture of same-sex sexual behavior", Science (30 August 2019) — abstract via UK Biobank.
- John R. Blosnich et al., "Sexual Orientation Change Efforts, Adverse Childhood Experiences, and Suicide Ideation and Attempt Among Sexual Minority Adults, United States, 2016–2018", American Journal of Public Health 110:7 (2020), pp. 1024–1030.
- ILGA World, Laws on Us (2024), as reported by PinkNews (5 June 2024).
- Yaqeen Institute, "What Islam Says About LGBT", https://yaqeeninstitute.org/what-islam-says-about/lgbt.
- Naseeha Mental Health, helpline page, https://www.naseeha.org/helpline-textline.
- Kugle (2010)
- Vaid, AJISS (2017)
- K. Ali (2016)
- Ibn Ḥazm, Ṭawq al-Ḥamāma (Ar.)
- El-Rouayheb (2005)
- Ganna et al. (2019)